That quote is going to haunt the governor on the campaign trail this year.

He said it a couple of weeks before unveiling his state budget proposal Tuesday.

Advertisement

The statement gave many people hope that Gov. Corbett was finally ready to show some leadership on this front.

But apparently not. It seems the statement — made in reference to state House passage of a bill that would create a commission to rework Pennsylvania’s woefully outdated school subsidy formula — was just campaign trail blather.

If something is truly important to a governor, you would expect it to be part of his budget address.

But Gov. Corbett didn’t say a word about the school funding formula — or reforming property taxes.

Oh, he talked a good bit about school funding. He proposed more for schools — but that money comes with strings attached:

• An extra $20 million for special education funding.

• $240 million in new “Ready to Learn” block grants targeted to programs the governor said are proven winners (Pre-K, STEM programs, etc.)

That money will be welcomed and well-used (and there’s nothing wrong with targeting funds for programs that we know are important). But the basic education formula remains the same under the governor’s proposal — and the state subsidy is flat.

Those subsidies are based on a formula that’s been frozen since the early ’90s ­and holds districts “harmless” (even if they’re shrinking).

The formula doesn’t reflect reality.

It’s not “fair,” as Gov. Corbett pointed out.

It hurts school districts in growing communities.

It leads to property tax increases that especially hurt seniors on fixed incomes.

It needs to change — and that commission to rewrite the formula is a good first step. (Though it’s worth noting that this is an exercise in deja voodoo economics, because a “costing out” study several years ago did much of that work, and some recommendations were implemented before the Corbett administration hit the brakes.)

So where was all this in the governor’s budget address?

OK, we get it. These are complex issues that can be politically messy, and the point of Tuesday’s speech was to put a simple, happy face on a very unpopular governorship. Eliminating property taxes means raising other taxes. Changing the funding formula creates winners and losers. And in an election year, politicians only want to talk about win-win situations.

But where does that leave us?

If the governor won’t take the lead on these crucial issues with a specific budget proposal because he’s up for re-election, will lawmakers — most of whom also face the voters this year?

We can’t afford another wasted year. Children who live in our struggling cities — who are shortchanged educationally simply because of where they live — cannot afford these political games.

We need true leadership on this issue — and the person who provides it is person who should be elected governor.